BizMOOC Discussion 05 Issues for MOOC …...2016/11/05 · foresight of the incomes of north American HEIs, states that MOOCs certificates should be considered as an experiment in

[Type text] [Type text] [Type text]

08 Fall

BizMOOC Discussion 05 Issues for MOOC recognition/certification/accreditation

The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only

of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi-ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

2016 | CC-BY 2

BizMOOC Discussion 05

Issues for MOOC recognition/certification/

accreditation

R.1.1 BizMOOC - BizMOOC - Knowledge Alliance to enable a European-wide exploitation of the potential of MOOCs for

the world of business

Programme: Erasmus+ | Key Action 2 | Knowledge Alliances

Reference Number: 562286-EPP-1-2015-1-AT-EPPKA2-KA

Grant agreement number: 2015-2929 / 001-001

Project Duration: 36 months, 1/1/2016 – 31/12/2018



2016 | CC-BY 3

Table of Contents

1. Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 2. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 4 3. International context ...................................................................................................................................... 6 4. European context ......................................................................................................................................... 11 5. Main obstacles and challenges of recognition, certification and accreditation of MOOCs ........................ 13 6. Conclusions and considerations for the future ............................................................................................ 15 7. References ................................................................................................................................................... 15



2016 | CC-BY 4

Issues for MOOC recognition/certification/accreditation

Authors: Karolina Pietkiewicz (The National Unions of Students in Europe) & Oana M. Driha (University of Alicante)

1. Abstract

This paper aims at elaborating on the issues with regard to MOOCs’ recognition, certification and accreditation and

determines what should be considered in the nearest future to use MOOCs as a bridge between formal and non-formal

education.

MOOCs were not meant from the beginning to be part of the formal education, but as the time passes by, each time

more students enrolled in this type or courses are requiring some kind of certificate. This is not an easy task, but seems

to become a priority for a part of the students.

2. Introduction

Under the era of continuous and fulminant changes in information, communication and technology (ICT) field, the

knowledge evolution implied numerous changes in the public and private sector, higher education not beeing an

exception. There is no doubt on the need of increasing productivity and efficiency, and thus, efforts are undertaken in

adapting the high potential of ICT.

The education system is experiencing gradual but constant changes given the new possibilities derived from the

generation of open resources at international level (Bell, 2010). MOOCs appeared as a solution of the low or even lack

of adaptation of higher education to the challenges of the society of today especially given the effects of the economic

crisis on the employability. Therefore, gradual transformation took place from eLearning to OpenCourseWare. Given

the dynamic evolution of knowledge and ICT, MOOCs could be the new education methodology allowing the rapid

adaptation of curricula and contents to the new and changing requirements.

MOOCs can improve the effectiveness of education and innovation in learning that would provide broader access to

knowledge. They can make lifelong learning a reality helping learners to up-skill and re-skill regardless of their socio-

economic situation (Vassiliou, 2013). More socially inclusive and open for new learning and teaching methods, they

can be increasingly useful if widely recognised, which however is burdened due to mainly two reasons - quality and

financial resources. In other words, the combination of digital content and global connectivism is enabling the perfect

scenario for the introduction of new changes in higher education. Furthermore, and following Weller and Anderson

(2013), the consolidation of new methodologies in the education system depends on the capacity to avoid the



2016 | CC-BY 5

re4sistance to change and the support of the institutional ability to adapt and understand new challenges in the education

field.

Since its inception in 2008, MOOCs have experienced a rapid growth in interest at the time that the need to address

issues of learner assessment and accreditation was also increasing (McGreal et al., 2014). The fact that digital learning

(with content obtained via Internet) enabling knowledge and skills acquisition via formal or informal learning, alone or

in groups, does not implies that learners will achieve the assessment of the learning nor an appropriate academic

recognition (Taylor, 2011; Mackintosh, McGreal & Taylor, 2011).

Recognition constitutes one of the three incentives of MOOCs (other two are learner’s satisfaction and completion). The

knowledge of getting newly acquired skills and competences recognised by the higher education institution, education

provider or employer encourages the learners to take up courses for the purpose of personal and professional

development. More importantly, knowing that a course will not be completed only for the learner’s satisfaction can lead

to decrease in dropout rates.

The recognition, accreditation and certification could be defined in many different ways, but generally, it refers to

establishing a set of arrangements to make visible and value all learning outcomes (incl. knowledge, skills and

competence) against clearly defined and quality-assured standards (Yang, 2016). Moreover, according to the ECTS

users´ guide “recognition of non-formal and informal learning - the process through which an institution certifies that

the learning outcomes achieved and assessed in another context (non-formal or informal learning) satisfy (some or all)

requirements of a particular programme, its component or qualification”.

It is relevant to mention that recognition procedures are based on compatibility of learning outcomes rather than

comparing the content. This should be mirrored in its open and flexible approach to recognition, aiming at making the

lifelong learning a reality and education accessible for all.

Proper recognition and accreditation procedures and certification can offer an educational solution for those who are not

in a traditional setting, they can constitute an opportunity of virtual mobility or simply provide a chance of re-skilling or

up-skilling employees. However, the adequate usage of those processes is yet to become a reality. The following

sections of this paper will provide the insight in the international and European context of the issues of MOOC

recognition, accreditation and certification along with outlining the key ones to face in the nearest future.



2016 | CC-BY 6

3. International context

A large amount of MOOC providers as well as researchers are highlighting the need for a solution for the

withdraw/dropout rate of MOOCs. It is acknowledged that dropout rates of this kind of courses are rather high

(Koutropoulos et al., 2012). A MOOC offered by Coursera in 2012, on Functional Programming Principles in Scala,

registered a completion rate of 19.2% (Jordan, 2013). Nevertheless, it must be stated that the majority of MOOCs have

completion rates of less than 10% and little is known about the experiences of non-completing MOOC participants

(Koutropoulos et al., 2012).

Motivation has been identified as an important contributor to student engagement in a MOOC (Milligan et al., 2013;

Milligan et al., 2016). What can motivate people to engage in MOOCs? Individual motivation can go from the desire to

achieve an academic credential at a reduced cost, personal enrichment, up to self-satisfaction (Liyanagunawardena,

Adams and Williams, 2013). It must be underlined that having updated information about the actual motivations in

place would be valuable, among others, for the design of MOOCs.

According to Milligan et al. (2016), while high self-regulator students establish specific goals related to the course

content, the effect on their professional needs and the structure of their learning around the development of content

knowledge and expertise (Pintrich, 1999), low self-regulators focus more on their passion for learning, curiosity, or

desire to broaden their knowledge. The range of motivation is reflected by the goals set (Zheng et al., 2015; White et al.,

2015). Moreover, high self-regulators are pursuing the extension of their knowledge and expertise to benefit their

current or future roles independently if they were intending to complete the course, or if the study process was planned

more strategically. On the opposite, low-self regulators are not focusing the learning, but mainly their performance,

looking for the completition of the course. In this case, the recognition of MOOCs and their accreditation could be a

more valuable source of motivation than for high self-regulators.

Together with the monetization, the recognition/certification is one of the most polemic aspects. In fact, the

accreditation process opens the door towards an income source at the time it is the way of evaluating the learning

process, offering the certification needed/requested by the employers (BIS, 2013). According to Moody´s, regarding the

foresight of the incomes of north American HEIs, states that MOOCs certificates should be considered as an experiment

in the attempt of obtaining extra incomes by granting credits (Moody's Investor Service, 2013).

Usually, educational technology companies like Coursera, edX or Udacity conduct MOOCs. These companies are

offering different types of certification for which a fee must be paid. The scale of these fees depends on the type of

course. It must be highlighted that certification for a MOOC is offered and recognized by at least one higher education

institution. Traditionally learners enrol with one institution and expect to receive the teaching, the content, the

assessment and the eventual accreditation from this very same institution (Murray and Friesen, 2011).



2016 | CC-BY 7

Table 1. A comparison of the certification offered by Coursera and edX

Aspects Coursera edX

Time frame for deciding

the use of the Signature

Track or not

3 weeks

Steps to be taken

(authentication procedure)

• Payment of $30 to $100 (depending on the course). • Submit a recognized ID (e.g., drivers license) + take

a picture of yourself via webcam => Identification & authenticity

• Type a short writing sample, for “keystroke” signature to be used after each test.

• Payment of $25 to $300 (depending on the course).

Certificates Payment Payment

With HEI With HEI

Types of certificates • Verified (the majority are priced at $49) • Specialization (a sequence of courses that culminate

into a capstone Project at the en; 45% of Coursera courses offer this kind of certificate)

• Verified (very similar to Coursera´s price strategy)

• Professional Education (from $49 to $949)

• Credit • XSeries1

Source: own elaboration.

According to Ronney De Winter from Class Central2, the pricing of courses can be classified in four main categories as

follows:

• Courses priced at $49. The majority of Coursera´s courses are in this category.

• Courses priced at $79. These seem to be generally courses for skills with a high demand in the job market

(especially IT, programming or business-related courses).

• Courses priced at $29. The majority are in Chinese, Spanish, or Portuguese. Thus, most probably these courses

are targeting developing countries.

• Courses priced over $100. They’re mostly capstone courses for business and leadership related topics.

1 Recently, for the students who overcome a series of site courses in computer science, a certificate is offered by the Massachusetts Technological Institute. This would be the so-called XSeries certificate offered by edX platform non-luccro MIT and Harvard University. Kolowich (2014) expects to be a trend followed also by other universities in the near future. Different courses offered by Coursera were recognized for granting credits by the Council for Education of the United States: (1) "Bioeletricity: A Quantitative Approach", Duke University; (2) other ods (3) "Pre-Calculus" and (4) "Algebra" Calofornia University in Invirne; and (5) "Calculus: Single Variable" from the University of Pennsylvania. All five courses are offered through Coursera platform counting with the endorsement of the Council based on the value of these courses to be worthy of official credits. 2 Retrived from https://www.class-central.com/u/43904



2016 | CC-BY 8

Digital revolution was born in the United States. It all started in 2012 when two biggest global MOOC platforms –

Udacity and Coursera – were first launched. It soon became clear that in order to be competitive MOOCs cannot just

provide knowledge, but also should be able to offer a credible qualification. This realisation was mirrored in the activity

of the American Council on Education that has started reviewing selected Coursera’s classes for credit equivalency.

Consequently, the universities can recognise them for the purpose of pursuing with the formal educational path, but are

not obliged to (The economist, 2012).

Policy-wise, the issue of recognition of digital education has been tackled by international organisations such as

UNESCO or OECD that have been emphasising the added value of e-learning methods particularly in its wide social

outreach. UNESCO’s Education 2030: Framework For Action underlines the importance of access to quality basic,

vocational and higher education with a clear commitment to lifelong learning strengthened by the usage of ICT tools.

Additionally, it reads as follow: In addition, the provision of flexible learning pathways, as well as the recognition,

validation and accreditation of the knowledge, skills and competencies acquired through non-formal and informal

education, is important (UNESCO, 2015).

When integrating informal learning (open learning) with the formal one, one of the major hurdles in this process is the

assessment of learning and its accreditation toward a credential (Conrad, 2013; Friesen and Wihak, 2013). Following

McGreal et al. (2014), academic assessment is still the privilege and purview of individual post secondary systems.

Despite the development of national accreditation frameworks, international ones are still to be developed and adapted

to the new needs due to the introduction of each time more informal learning options (e.g., MOOC and other open

learning tools).

As an example of assessment or accreditation for informal learning, the secondary system counts with two main types

as depicted below:

• The Recognition of Prior Learning (RPL)3: it is very popular and followed by examinations that allow

learners to challenge-for-credit through assignments, examinations, interviews, courses, tutorials,

demonstrations, self-assessment, external evaluations, essays, face-to-face or online workshops, and a variety

of other instruments (Conrad and McGreal, 2012). RPL option is more resource intensive, as staff for

prospective students is needed. Nevertheless, RPL-intensive institutions already count with resources and

structured in this sense like policy, research, repositories and experience with licensing, for example (McGreal

et al., 2014).

3 Also referred to as Accreditation of Prior and Experiential Learning (APEL), Prior Learning Assessment (PLA, mainly in the USA) and Prior Learning Assessment and Recognition (PLAR, mainly in Canada), among others (McGreal et al., 2014).



2016 | CC-BY 9

• Credit transfer: it is meant mainly to grant credit to students with courses from other institutions. Credit

transfer, compared to RPL, is a less labour-intensive option, but sometimes it can be problematic for students.

With a different credit system all over the world (except for the countries which decided to implement or adapt

their systems to the European one through the ECTS), credit transfer could cause discrepancies and possible

disagreements.

In the same line, MOOC movement is facing a clear need of alternative assessment and despite the fact that many

institutions around the world are considering these alternatives there is a long way to go. A possible option could be

RPL (Camilleri and Tannhäuser, 2012; Conrad, 2013).

As we stand today, there are mainly three types of recognition/certificates offered by MOOCs, as follows:

• The majority of MOOCs are offering digital badges for completition of either the entire course, of each

unit or of a week of work (e.g., OLDSMOOC by Open University).

• Other MOOCs, as the ones facilitated by Coursera, offer proctored exams for a fee, which will involve the

earning of a certificate, together with a higher education institution (HEI), for successful students (see figure

1).

• Some other MOOCs provide a Statement of Accomplishment for successful students, but in this case no college credits are associated to this type of certificate4.

Figure 1. Certificates of MOOCs

(a) Coursera (b) edX

4 The American Council on Education recommended different Coursera courses for college credit at the time a California bill is seeking credit for students taking faculty approved courses online. Nevertheless, one year after the first attempt of the University to grant credit to students who had passed a MOOC no results was registered in this sense (Jobe, 2014).



2016 | CC-BY 10

Source: www.coursera.org and www.edx.org

It is true that for higher education institutions the perspective is more complex as they have to face conflicting

challenges (Pundak et al., 2014):

(a) They must facilitate up-to-date knowledge in a permanent changing context (in all or almost all fields).

(b) They have to guide students in the examination process through broad-based observation while considering

different scientific disciplines.

Furthermore, HEIs are operating under several limitations as leaning program boundaries, budgetary constructions and

lack of accessibility to experts in different areas, as well as the limited series of courses offered to the students. Pundak

et al. (2014) are highlighting that in order overcome all these limitations Ort Braude Academic College of Engineering

opted for an experimental program allowing students to enrol for MOOC courses under the college’s supervision,

beeing eligible for accreditation in the case of successful completition. Nevertheless, a very low rate of students

considered the registration (less than 3%) and not even 2% were accepted for the program.

The problem is not (just) the low rate of students, but the evaluation of the learning of each one of the students enrolled

(which normally means thousands of students). For this purpose, several tools could be employed (Pundak et al., 2014):

(a) Automatic examination of closed questions: it is generally given a weekly question with answers prepared

beforehand by course lecturer and staff. The questions could be from multiple choice, correct/incorrect, fill in a

blank, a numerical or mathematical question, etc. Immediate feedback is given by the automatic system.

Multiple attempts are generally given to the students in this kind of evaluation system.

(b) Peer evaluation: based on an open assignment. Thus, each component of the assignment with the

corresponding predetermined value must be previously made public for the students before performing the

assignment. Based on these details as well as on several detailed examples, students are asked to evaluate the

work of their colleagues on the course. This tool enables the creation of a community of learners with different

perspectives and gives the chance of exchanging views and deliberating on the way to evaluate products.

Hence, a more active role of students is fostered. However some drawback should be underlined: its validity,

the influence on creativity and the quality of the feedback.

(c) Examination through artificial intelligence.

Nevertheless, some speculations have been made related to the loss of the monopoly of HEIs of granting degrees or

credits due to the introduction of badges and certificates granted by other educational institutions and considered in the

labour market (Gaebel, 2014; Fain, 2014).



2016 | CC-BY 11

The MOOC certificates are not necessary the most relevant aspect now as the authenticity/identification seems to have a

greater demand. Moreover, according to Yuan and Powell (in the JISC-CETIS report of March 2013), the certification

is not such an important element as the majority of the students enrolled in MOOCs already have a degree.

4. European context

Following Androulla Vassiliou, the previous Commissioner for Education, Culture, Youth and Sports, when launching

Commission’s Opening Up Education initiative in 2013, the EU is also planning to encourage the recognition and

validation of skills acquired through digital learning.

There is also a Bologna Process context, which in the case of European region plays a significant role in the digital

transformation in education. As the latest Communique, a document that is periodically issued by the Ministers of

Higher Education of all members of the European Higher Education Area (EHEA)5, reads: “Fair academic and

professional recognition, including recognition of non formal and informal learning, is at the core of the EHEA”.

The European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) is a tool of the

European Higher Education Area (EHEA). Hence, it is used only within higher education systems aiming at making

studies and courses comparable and transparent. Therefore, it helps enhance the quality of higher education. It started to

integrate the experience abroad into the curriculum at mother-university and now it has become a tool to incorporate

various types of learning experience into the formal education in lifelong perspective. It can apply to all programmes

regardless of the mode of delivery (classroom-based, distance and work-based learning) and learning context – formal,

informal, non-formal (European Commission, 2015). Thus, this tool could be potentially used also for the purpose of

recognising MOOCs for the purpose of formal education. There are already examples of European universities that

offer course credits towards the degree for completion of MOOCs. Through FutureLearn platform, learners can take up

courses towards their future programme for free, however should a learner want to pursue with the programme, the

access to this may be hampered, as they would have to first pay for the certificate of achievement and final assessment

(Ali, 2016).

A British report “The Maturing of MOOCs” clearly states that the increasing formal recognition of MOOCs constitutes

a priority for policy-makers and institutions. The accreditation methods said to include badges and adoption of

5 More information on EHEA http://www.ehea.info



2016 | CC-BY 12

validation techniques (e.g., keyboard tracking, honour codes). Nevertheless, it is worth noting that there is a lack of any

systematic solution for policy on credit recognition (Department of Business, Innovation&Skills, 2015).

OpenupEd has provided some indication of their accreditation and funding models. It is suggested that all courses may

lead to recognition by means of a completion certificate or a credit certificate that may count towards a degree. The

credit certificate comes with a cost attached ranging from €25 to €400, depending on the course length and institution.

The majority of courses, despite the use of 11 languages initially and Arabic afterwards, are either in English or

Spanish, largely drawn from two large distance-teaching institutions - the Open University and Universidad Nacional de

Educación a Distancia (Department of Business, Innovation&Skills, 2015).

According to the European Commission, the European Union is trying to “stimulate teachers and educational

institutions to test innovative digital approaches” (Kroes and Vassiliou, 2013). However, without an active participation

of students and learners - this goal might be difficult to achieve, therefore the Member States and the European

countries should be further encouraged to use the opportunities available for all, not only to a privileged groups of the

society. Attempts to better accessibility could exemplified with the practice of Freiburg University in Germany, which

started awarding credits for a course offered by Udacity (The economist, 2012).

Daniel et al. (2015) are underlining that in Europe there has not been a“profound reflection on whether MOOC should

grant loans and whether these loans could be approved under the credit system”in the European Higher Education

(ECTS). But if MOOCs do not grant any credit both in the hybrid and distance models no changes in the higher

education system are envisioned as a consequence of this new trend, MOOCs, unless the accreditation of HEIs is

coexisting with the MOOCs certificates (Gaebel, 2014).

Given the European System of Mobility among Member States, students can easily transfer credits earned at any

university in one of the 53 countries who signed the Lisbon Recognition Agreement, independently if the knowledge,

skills and competences were acquired through non-formal, informal or formal courses. Following the CEO of Iversity,

Hans Klöpper, students have the capacity of identifying a high quality courses by the fact that the content is open to

anyone. Once the completition of such courses is increasing, the demand for its accreditation will rise as well and for

European HEIs will not be easy to resist to the temptation of recognising this new form of learning (The Economist,

2014). Moreover, the legal framework could be adapted in the member states of the European Union as well as in the

rest of the countries who signed the Lisbon Recognition Agreement and in line with the governmental requirements for

lifelong learning and secondary school (Hollands and Tirthali, 2014).



2016 | CC-BY 13

5. Main obstacles and challenges of recognition, certification and

accreditation of MOOCs

Some of the courses that are organised by MOOC providers, offered by MOOC platforms or partnerships lead to either

certificate of completion, a badge or credit course. None of those are usually accredited, nor follow any general rules

regarding certification of educational courses.

Initially, MOOCs has not aimed at awarding credits at all. The possible confirmation of taking up a MOOC is a

certificate of attendance of completion. Even though the courses themselves are free of charge – obtaining any kind of

evidence that one has been enrolled or completed such course is often issued upon a fee. Those certificates are designed

by the MOOC provider and are usually not formally recognised by any other institution (Geabel, 2013).

It is worth mentioning that within the realm of open online courses the traditional accreditation models are not

appropriate (Rodríguez, 2012). The issue is even more complex when it comes to c-MOOCs as assess or give credits

when the participants are not performing the same tasks. Another issue to take into consideration is the fact that many

participants are peripheral. The same happens with the content of the courses because it is not static content from the

beginning until its completition. The content is on a continues evolution. Hence, perhaps not all types of MOOCs

should include a certification but could be used as an introduction to subjects further offered through formal learning

tools (Rodríguez, 2012).

Following Bacsich et al. (2013), not many institutions indicate they either produce or use open educational resources

and where the production is high, the coordination between institutions is low and the governmental support is lacking

or is too low. When it comes to the institutions that are looking for the assessment and accreditation of open courses the

numbers are even lower (Conrad et al., 2013). Despite these challenges, the open education movement is a reality.

In order to facilitate lifelong learning, MOOCs should play a role of a bridge between formal and non-formal education

and therefore their recognition through, for instance recognition of prior learning should be possible, regardless whether

the proof of completion (in the form of credits or certificate) was acquired or not. Eventually, what count is the skills

and competences obtained.

Having analysed the available literature and other sources it can be stated that the issue of awarding credits and issuing

(accredited) certificates is inseparable from hardly responsive higher education and education and training systems,

quality and economic reasons. In this section we will consider those as the key issues hampering recognition,

accreditations and certification, commencing with the latter one.

Since the economic crisis the European education discourse has even more shifted towards the direction of developing a

knowledge society that benefits the growth of economies, it is of high importance to acknowledge that education and



2016 | CC-BY 14

learning need to be tailored according to the societal needs and not to the needs of the economy solely. Education and

learning serve multiple purposes where employability is only one of the facets, along preparing active citizens for life in

democratic societies, fostering social mobility, personal development and securing sustainable development for the

societies we live in. This should be reflected in how educational opportunities are financed and governed.

To provide an example of how the discourse has been steered by the economic benefits of MOOCs we have carried out

an exercise for the purpose of this paper aiming and a limited and selective on-line articles review. All six articles

included in our biography constituted a sample for the word analysis exercise. We have been analysing the way the

benefits of MOOCs are presented and we found examples of economy-driven narrative, which is shown in the table

below.

Table 2. Review of selected articles in Web magazines about MOOCs

Citation Source Comment

Whatever your opinion, the US-inspired massive open online courses (Moocs) prove the existence of an enormous untapped market for high-quality distance learning and a potentially profitable revenue stream.

Independetnt.co.uk Commodified language, focus on marketisation instead of wider access to education.

Even if MOOCs can coin sound academic currency, they must also make real money. (...) The first way of generating revenue is a “freemium” model, in which the course is free but the graduation certificate is paid-for.

The economist Commodified language, focus on marketisation instead of wider access to education. Emphasis on the fact that a learner cannot obtain a ‘proof of attendance and results’ unless they pay.

If students can prove that [that means acquiring certain skills - authors’ note], they will not have to pay tuition -- at least not unless so many students ask for credits that the university needs to start charging a fee to handle all the requests.

Inside Higher Ed Refers specifically to recognition process as a costly procedure that a learner will have to cover the costs of.

OpenupEd, says the report, has suggested that all its courses may lead to recognition, “for example with a completion certificate or a credit certificate that may count towards a degree”. There will be costs attached to credit certificates, ranging from €25 to €400 (US$540), depending on the course length and institution.

The University World News

Emphasis on the fact that a learner cannot obtain a ‘proof of attendance and results’ unless they pay.

Source: own elaboration. On of the issues arising from the current status of MOOCs is the misleading narrative. MOOCs are said to be tools that

could cater for the educational needs of those who cannot pursue their professional education due to, in the majority of

the cases, socio-economic reasons. However, even after having completed a course, an individual may not be able to

use skills or competences acquired, as the way they were obtained, even though it should not make any difference, is an

obstacle for the skills and competences to be fully recognised by a HEI or employer.



2016 | CC-BY 15

6. Conclusions and considerations for the future

It is clear that a legal framework regarding the recognition/certification/accreditation on non-formal and informal

education could facilitate the evolution of the education system as well as its adaptation to the needs and requirement of

the XXI century society.

There is no doubt that this process didn´t even started at a global level, but there is interest in this sense at least at

European level. Moreover, the needs of adaptation and of diversifying incomes of educational institutions (universities

or not) put new methodologies as MOOCs in the spotlight of these institutions. The costs and the knowledge needed for

producing and offering MOOCs conducted to increasing need of synergies between universities and different platforms

like Coursera, edX, Udacity, etc.

The proliferation of MOOCs included also new challenges and new requirements from the consumers of MOOCs.

Among others, the recognition of this type of courses started to be one of the most important issues to be solved by the

producers. Universities count with the trust of society in the accreditation process of formal learning. Thus, higher

education institutions are needed. Without their involvement, the process is not covering the needs of the consumers.

However, academic boards and senates of many universities are hostile to reuse open-licensed courses and associated

assessments even though those materials have been formally approved by another accredited university and even though

these open courses can be adapted locally at no cost and offered in parallel with existing courses in order to diversify

curriculum at the home institution. This reticence could be translated into a poor business strategy and foresight.

Additionally, governmental bodies should and could be involved in order to give an even stronger support to this

process of accreditation and to the official certificates requested and liked to new teaching/learning methodologies as

MOOCs.

7. References

Bacsich, P., Nie, M., Jeans, N., Schuwer, R., Karran, T., Witthaus, G. (2013). POERUP Elevator Pitch: 26 Countries in

26 Minutes, Slideshare March 27th. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/witthaus/poerup-elevator-pitch

Bell, F. (2010). Network theories for technology-enabled learning and social change: Connectivism and actor network

theory. Paper presented at the Seventh International Conference on Networked Learning, Aalborg, Denmark. Retrieved

from http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fss/organisation/netlc/past/nlc2010/abstracts/Creanor.html



2016 | CC-BY 16

BIS (2013). The maturing of the MOOC: Literature review of massive open online courses and other forms of online

distance learninig. BIS Research Paper 130. Retrived from

http://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/upload/attachemnt_data/file/240193/13-1173-maturing-of-the-mooc.pdf

Camilleri, A.F. and Tannnhäuser, A.-C. (2012). Open learning recognition: Taking open education resources a step

further. Brussels, Belgium: EFQUEL.

COM/2013/0654 final, Opening up Education: innovative teaching and learning for all through new Technologies and

Open Educational Resources, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the

European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.

Conrad, D. (2013). Assessment challenges in open learning: Way-finding, fork in the road, or end of the line? Open

Praxis 5(1): 1-7. Retrived from http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.v5i1.17

Conrad, D. and McGreal, R. (2012). Flexible paths to assessment for OER learners: A comparative study. Journal of

Interactive Media in Education 2. Retrived from http://www-jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2012-12

Daniel J., Making Sense of MOOCs - Musings in a Maze of Myth, Paradox and Possibility, in: Academic Partnerships,

12/2012. Retrived from http://doi.org/10.5334/2012-18

Daniel, J.,Vásquez, E., Gisbert Cervera, M. (2015). El fututro de los MOOC: ¿aprendizaje adaptativo o modelo de

negocio? Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento 12(1): 64-73. Retrived from

http://dx.doi.org/10.7238/rusc.v12i1.1887

DeBoer, J., Ho, A.D., Stump, G. S., Breslow,L. (2014). Changing ‘Course’ Reconceptualizing Educational Variables

for Massive Open Online Courses, EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHER 43(2): 74–84.

Department of Business, Innovation&Skills, The Maturing of the MOOC - literature review of Massive Open Online

Courses and other forms of distance learning, Research Paper no 130, September 2015, London.

European Commission, Education and Culture Directorate General, (2015).ECTS Users’ Guide, Luxembourg:

Publications Office of the European Union.

European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice, (2015). The European Higher Education Area in 2015: Bologna Process

Implementation Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.

European Students’ Union (ESU) (2013a). Policy paper on quality of higer edcuation (amended). Retrived from

http://www.esu-online.org/news/article/6064/Policy-paper-on-quality-of-higher-education/

European Students’ Union (ESU) (2013b.) Quest for Quality for Students: A Student Quality Concept



2016 | CC-BY 17

European Students’ Union (ESU) (2016.) Introduction to ESU’s policies in higher education (amended). Retrived from

http://www.esu-online.org/news/article/6064/Introduction-to-ESUs-policies-in-higher-education/

European Recognition Manual, second edition, (2016). Retrived from http://www.esu-

online.org/asset/News/6001/8220_European-Recognition-Manual-Second-Edition-FIN.pdf

Fain, P. (2014). Ideas take shape for new accreditors aimed at emerging online providers. Inside Higher Ed. Retrived

from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/05/09/ideas-take-shape-new-accreditors-aimed-emerging-

onlineproviders#sthash.TrrbNDAP.dpbs

Friesen, N. and Wihak, C. (2013). From OER to PLAR: Credentialing for open education. Open Praxis 5(1): 49-58.

Retrvied from http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/openpraxis.5.1.22

Gaebel, M. (2013). EUA Occasional Papers, MOOCs - Massive Open Online Courses, EUA. Retrived from

http://www.eua.be/Libraries/publication/EUA_Occasional_papers_MOOCs.pdf?sfrsn=0

Gaebel, M. (2014). MOOCS Massive Open Online Courses. European University Association, 1-35. Retrived from

https://oerknowledgecloud.org/content/moocs-massive-open-online-courses

Hollands, F. y Tirthali, D. (2014). MOOCs: expectations and reality. Full report . Nueva York: Columbia University,

Center for Benefit-Cost Studies of Education, Teachers College. Retrived from http://cbcse.org/wordpress/wp-

content/uploads/2014/05/MOOCs_Expectations_and_Reality.pdf

Kolowich, S. (2013a). A University’s Offer of Credit for a MOOC Gets No Takers, The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Kolowich, S. (2013b). American Council on Education recommends 5 MOOCs for credit. The Chronicle of Higher

Education. Recuperado de https://chronicle.com/article/American-Council-on-Education/137155/

Kolowich, S. (2014). Coursera will offer certificates for sequences of MOOCs. The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Retrived from http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/coursera-will-offer-certificates-for-sequences-of-

moocs/49581

Kroes, N., Vassiliou, A. (2013). Opening up Education - Making the 21th century classroom a reality. European

Commission. Retrived from http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-747_en.htm?locale=en

Liyanagunawardena, T.K., Adams, A.A., Williams, S.A. (2013). MOOCs: A Systematic Study of the Published

Literature 2008-2012. The international Rewview of Research in Open and Distributed Learning14(3):202-227.

Retrived from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1455/2531



2016 | CC-BY 18

MacGregor K., (2013). MOOCs make waves in higher education worldwide, University World News. Retrived from

http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20130920142318192&query=MOOC

Mackintosh, W., McGreal, R., Taylor, J. (2011). Open Education Resources (OER) for assessment and credit for

students’ projects: Towards a logic model and plan for action. Retrieved from. Retrived from

http://hdl.handle.net/2149/3039

McGreal, R., Conrad, D., Murphy, A., Witthaus, G., Mackintosh, W. (2014). Formalising informal learning:

Assessment and accreditation challenges within disaggregated systems. Open Praxis 6(2): 125-133. Rtrived from

http://www.openpraxis.org/index.php/OpenPraxis/article/view/114

Milligan, C., Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., (2013). Patterns of engagement in massive open online courses. MERLOT

Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 149-159. Retrieved from

http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/milligan_0613.pdf

Milligan, Colin, Littlejohn, A., Hood, N. (2016). Learning in MOOCs: A Comparison Study, Proceedings of the

European Stakeholder Summit on experiences and best practices in and around MOOCs. In: Proceedings of the

EUROPEAN STAKEHOLDER SUMMIT on experiences and best practices in and around MOOCs (EMOOCS 2016)

(Khalil , Mohammad; Ebner, Martin; Kopp, Michael; Lorenz, Anja and Kalz, Marco eds.), Karl-Franzens-Universit ̈at

Graz, Graz, pp. 15–26. Retrived from http://oro.open.ac.uk/46383/8/Learninginmoocs.pdf

Moody´s Investor Service (2013). US Higher Education Outlook Negative in 2013. Retrived from

https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-2013-outlook-for-entire-US-Higher-Education-sector-changed--

PR_263866

Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal

of Educational Research, 31, 459-470.

Rivard R., Rubber Hits the Road, (2013). Inside Higher Education. Retrived from

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/08/08/researchers-wait-see-if-students-want-transfer-credits-moocs

Rodriguez, C. O. (2012). MOOCs and the AI-Stanford like Courses: Two Successful and Distinct Course Formats for

Massive Open Online Courses. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. Retrived from

http://www.eurodl.org/index.php?p=archives&year=2013&halfyear=2&article=516

Schroeder, R. (2012). Emerging Open Online Distance Education Environment, Continuing Higher Education Review

76: 90– 99.



2016 | CC-BY 19

Taylor, J. C. (2011). The OER university: From logic model to action plan. Keynote Address. Open Planning meeting

for the OER assessment and credit for students project, Otago Polytechnic, 23 February 2011, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Retrieved from http://wikieducator.org/OERU_meeting_summary

The Economist, (2012). Online courses are transforming Higher Education creating new opportunities. Retrived from

http://www.economist.com/news/international/21568738-online-courses-are-transforming-higher-education-creating-

new-opportunities-best

The Economist (2014). The future of universities. The digital degree. Retrived from

http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21605899-staid-higher-education-business-about-experience-welcome-

earthquake-digital

Tickle L., (2014). Will degree made up of MOOCs ever be worth the paper it’s written on?, The Guardian. Retreived

from http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/blog/2014/jun/12/moocs-viable-alternative-traditional-

degree

Todorovski B., E. Nordal, T. Isoski, (2015). Overview on student-centred learning in Higher Education in Europe -

research study, Brussels: the European Students’ Union.

UNESCO, (2015). Education 2030: Framework for Action, Towards inclusive and equitable quality education and

lifelong learning for all. Retirved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002432/243278e.pdf

UNESCO, Framework for Action, Towards inclusive and equitable education and lifelong learning for all. Retrived

from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002432/243278e.pdf

Universities UK (2013). Massive open online courses: higher education's digital moment? Retrived from

http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/policy-and-analysis/reports/Documents/2013/massive-open-online-courses.pdf

Vassiliou, A. (2013). First European MOOCs – a milestone for education. European Commission, April 25, [cited

April 25 2013]. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-13-368_en.htm?locale=en

Verstelle, M., Schreuder, M., Jelgerhuis, H. (2014). Recognition of MOOCs in the education sector, in: Open Education

Trend Report 2014.

Weller, M. and Anderson, T. (2013). Digital resilience in Higher Education. In European Journal of Open, Distance

and E-Learning, 16(1). Retrived from http://oro.open.ac.uk/36988/1/Weller_Anderson.pdf

White, S., Davis, H., Dickens, K. P., Leon, M., & Sanchez Vera, M. (2015). MOOCs: What motivates producers and

participants. In S. Zvacek, M. Restivo, J. Uhomoibhi, & M. Helfert (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th International

Conference on Computer Supported Education (pp. 99-114). Heidelberg: Springer.



2016 | CC-BY 20

Yang, J. (2015). Recognition, validation and accreditation of non-formal and informal learning in UNESCO Member

States, UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning.

Yuan, L., Powell, S. (2013). MOOCs and Open Education: Implications for Higher Education. Retrived from

http://publications.cetis.org.uk/2013/667

Zheng, S., Rosson, M. B., Shih, P. C., Carroll, J. M. (2015). Understanding Student Motivation, Behaviors and

Perceptions in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work &

Social Computing (pp. 1882- 1895). ACM.

Zhenghao C., Alcorn B., Christensen G., Eriksson N., Koller D., Emanuel, J. E. (2015). Who’s Benefiting from MOOCs,

and Why, in: Harvard Business Review, 22 September 2015. Retrived from https://hbr.org/2015/09/whos-benefiting-

from-moocs-and-why